The Worthington advance. [volume] (Worthington, Minn.) 1874-1908, 1887-10-27
the CONDEMNED ANARCHISTS.
Their Cases Before the Supreme
Court Of the United States.

Their Cases Before the Supreme
Court Of the United States.
Gen. Roger A. Pryor, J. Randolph Tuck.
er, Gen. Butler. Mr.. Black and Mr.. Solo,
mon. counsel for the condemned Anarch.
lists OF Chicago. appeared before the Su-
preme Court of the United States in Wash.
ington, to move for writ OF error.
After reciting the history Vi the case and
stating that several OF the prisoners were
now under sentence OF death, Mr.. Pryor
said:
He would call the attention of the court
to only two points, which he relied upon
to show that the case at the bar presented
federal questions, and that such acts
and questions empowered this court to
take jurisdiction OF it and to grant the
writ OF error prayed for. The first of these
points related to tho jury by
Which ,.a the +nr prisoners ; were tried;
in March, 1874 that is, after the adop-
ton OF tho Fourteenth amendment to the
constitution, a law to regulate and govern
the empanelment Of juries in the state
courts. By virtue of that law O Jury for
the trial of q criminal case might be made
up, in part at least, OF jurors who had
formed IN opinion with regard to the guilt
or innocence OF the persons accused-jur.
YIN "uO "ol0 ptsTLIdI, anu even pFeluO1CeO
men. The law made it possible to put in.
to the jury box men who had formed an
opinion as to the prisioners' guilt which
could not be removed, except by strong evil
dence. This, he believed, had been done in
the case under consideration, and the pc
titioners asserted that this statute and the
effect given to it in the courts below had
deprived them of their rights, and was
about to deprive them Of their lives with.
11,%f ho 1f Ia,
by the federal constitution.
"What is that statute Mr.. Pryor." in.
quired the chief Justice.
Mr.. Pryor sent to the chief justice, ana
then read aloud that part of the act OF the
Illinois legislature. approved March IL,
1874, which provides:
1t shall not be cause OF challenge that
count of the com mission Of the crime with
which the prisoner is charged il such Juror
shall state on oath that he believes he can
render an impartial verdict according to
the law and the evidence. In the trial OF
any criminal case the fact that person
called as q juror has formed an opinion or
impression based upon rum0r or upon
newspaper statements (about tho truth oil
which he has expressed no opinion) shal not
disquality him to serve as juror in such case
II he shall upon oath state that he believes
he can fairly and impartially render q yer.
dict therein in accordance with the law
and the evidence, and the court shall be
satisfied Of the truth of such statement,
Said MIR. Pryor:
It appears on record that this statute
was called in question in the trial court 40
repugnant to the provisions both OF the
federal constitution and Of the constitu.
ton OF the Illinois supreme court, and the
latter afterward sustained the Judgment
The chief justice remarked that the only
question for this court was whether the
statute was constitutional. II the court
erred in it's administration OF the statute
that was question for the state courts.
Mr.. Pryor replied:
The action of the state court was the nc.
ton OF the state II tho statute wss ad.
ministered unfairly it was state action,
and that brought it within the Jurisdiction
Of his court. It must DO so, because
II state pass q seemingly fair
statute and then ignore it or administer it
unfairly, then the protection which the
fourteenth amendment isintendetl to give
is denied. To try a man for his life by q
partial jury 10 not and never Was due pro-
cess Of Law.
Mr.. Pryor's second point was:
The petitioners had been comp PEELED in tho
trial court to be witnesses against them.
selves. Some OF them were on tho stand.
and in spite Of the protests Of their coun.
sci they were compelled to submit to an
unrcstrained cross.examination and to
eliminate themselves. Compelling q man to
testify against himself 10 not due process IL